MENTIONING KHALISTAN ON SOCIAL MEDIA DOES NOT PROVE THAT A PERSON HAS KHALISTANI CONTACTS - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HC

The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted bail to a man accused of having Khalistani links and charged under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) for allegedly testing bombs and inciting the commission of terrorist offenses. 

The Court heard an appeal against an order passed by the Special NIA Judge. Whereby the NIA Judge dismissed the accused person's bail application on the ground that he has relations and contacts with a terrorist gang to support the Khalistan movement.

In 2016, the appellant was arrested for testing an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) with a co-accused. The Co-accused died during the pendency of the trial. Before his death, he made an extra-judicial confession that the appellant was with him when he had exploded a test bomb. 

The Counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the appellant was named as accused only because of his meeting with the other accused, which led to the allegation that he had become "highly radicalized." There was nothing on record to show that he was actually a member of any gang involved in illegal activity. The Counsel further informed that the appellant had been in custody for more than two years. 

A Bench of Justices GS Sandhawalia and Vikas Suri stressed that it is a well-settled position of law that a confession made before the police is weak evidence. The bench further discarded NIA's argument regarding social media accounts. It said that mere Khalistani mentions on the social media accounts and numbers saved with references of Khalistan do not prove that the appellant was a member of the terrorist group. 

The Court allowed the appeal with the condition that the appellant will report to the local police station every 15 days.

Author: Papiha Ghoshal